The Zero-RB Strategy: Still on board? (1 Viewer)

[Skoo]

I've always been against this strategy as I still believe RBs are the key to fantasy football.

As I've argued many times, while the NFL has become a passing league, this only makes RBs more valuable and QBs and WRs less valuable. Not sure why so many people think the opposite would be true. There are more viable WRs and QBs, and less viable RBs. Which makes the RBs more valuable.

If people waited until the 3rd/4th to get a RB, they were probably getting one of these guys as their #1 RB:

Reggie Bush, Joique, Gerhart, Sankey, Gore, Vereen, Rashad Jennings, Ridley, Spiller

Now if you landed Gore and Jennings you're probably happy, but otherwise....

Just curious what people think about this strategy now that we're a month into the season.

 

[Landro21]

I went with the "zero RB strategy" and I'm sitting at 4-0. That doesn't make it right. Draft the best players and you win it's really that simple.

 

[RealReactions]

I went Julio and DT as my 1-2 pick. morris and Jennings as 3-4 Matty ice at 5 then the next 6 picks I took flier running backs on 5 of the 6 picks. Helps that I picked up asiata of waivers whose been a stud last few games when I was just expecting just a flex. So far I'm happy with the results. Right now only first round running back that's paying off is matt forte. Ap, Jamal, shady McCoy, montee ball, and lacy are all struggling.

 

[Widbil83]

Did it in all 5 leagues and the worst record is 2-2. Took Morris and Gore in the FPC in the 5th and 8th round and am 3-1 and lead the league by 30 in pts. Still loving it.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Your definition of ZERO RB is odd.

 

[Rookie_Whisperer]

If your strict adherence to the "stud RB" theory landed you a combination of AP, Lacy, Foster, Martin, Ball, Ellington, Mathews, Tate, Vereen, Stacy, and then thought you'd be sneaky and grab Gerhart or Moreno as a RB3 or 4, you are probably pretty disappointed right about now....

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

If people waited until the 3rd/4th to get a RB, they were probably getting one of these guys as their #1 RB:

Reggie Bush, Joique, Gerhart, Sankey, Gore, Vereen, Rashad Jennings, Ridley, Spiller

Now if you landed Gore and Jennings you're probably happy, but otherwise....

Hey, don't forget Sugar Ray Rice on that list!

But the entire premise of your post is odd. Yes, many of the 4th-round RBs have underperformed, but relative to what? A "stud RB" strategy of Charles, McCoy, ADP, Lacy, Ball? How're those guys working out so far?

A bunch of guys drafted as RB1's disappointing and a bunch of guys drafted as RB3's outperforming means that if you picked the right RB3 and stayed away from the wrong RB1, you came out ahead, no matter where you took them. I fail to see how that validates or disproves a "strategy".

 

[Bucky86]

Week 1 my starting running backs were AP and Gerhart.

 

[TartanLion]

3-1 but I feel lucky to have that record to be honest. Dez, Jordy, Jimmy and some bits and bobs have pulled me through but with..

Spiller not doing much

Rice getting re-banned

Matthews going down injured

RG3 making matters worse

It has been a patchwork job involving a revolving door of WW RB's and its showing no signs of abating right now.

 

[GoBirds]

L Bell in the 3rd, 3-1.

 

[AuttieFootball]

I think it's all relative. The key is to get as many talented players who score lots of points as you can. Doesn't really matter the position.

I agree that the NFL becoming more and more of a passing league has made elite running backs more valuable (because there are very few stud every down bell-cows -- if you get one it gives you a huge advantage.)

That said, it also has led to elite WRs arguably becoming more consistent scorers than most elite backs. One of the top players in my main league has gone two straight years with very little invested at running back (he's all about three stud wideouts, stud TE.) He finished first in total points last year, is currently third. That said, the guy who's currently in first is in first because of his awesome running backs.

The position most marginalized, IMO, is QB. If you're in a 12 team league there is simply enough QB depth that it never makes sense to pursue a top flight QB. I got Rivers for $9 in my fantasy auction -- compare that to the guy who paid $50 for Peyton.

In conclusion to this tl:dr essay, it doesn't matter your strategy as long as you have good players.

 

[flapgreen]

I went Julio and DT as my 1-2 pick. morris and Jennings as 3-4 Matty ice at 5 then the next 6 picks I took flier running backs on 5 of the 6 picks. Helps that I picked up asiata of waivers whose been a stud last few games when I was just expecting just a flex. So far I'm happy with the results. Right now only first round running back that's paying off is matt forte. Ap, Jamal, shady McCoy, montee ball, and lacy are all struggling.

Jamaal isn't struggling. He just missed a couple games.

 

[Ilov80s]

Quick totally irrelevant analysis from my main league:

Top 3 teams drafted:

RB/WR

RB/QB

RB/QB

Bottom 3 went:

TE/RB

RB/RB

RB/WR

 

[FreeBaGeL]

As always, picking the right players can make any strategy look good or bad. If you went RB/RB and started with Lacy/Foster you're off to a pretty slow start, as is the guy that avoided RBs and started with Demaryius/Marshall.

The gyst of the argument for avoiding RBs is that the bust risk is lower in other positions, but what's ignored is that the ceiling is lower as well. I went Dez/Green in one league, and even though those were probably two of the better non-RB picks early on I feel like my team is pretty middling and they're not really making a huge difference to my RB deficiencies. Compare that to someone that went Lynch/Murray to start and they're at a MUCH bigger advantage than I am. Someone that went Lynch/Murray/Bell to start could probably have left the rest of their lineup empty and be sitting at 4-0 right now.

This is in reference to non-ppr, generally, but while it may be easier to "hit" on a non-RB, doing so doesn't provide you nearly the advantage that hitting on a RB does. Bottom line, even though I picked the "right" WRs at the end of the first round going WR/WR, my team has not been strong. If I'd picked the right RBs there, even though it's harder to do, I can't imagine I'd be saying that.

 

[cloppbeast]

I could see why it would have worked thus far with Peterson not playing, McCoy and Lacy not playing well, and Charles hurt 2 games so far. Of course, you would have to have picked the right running backs in the later rounds too, and the right wide receiver in the early rounds.

I seriously doubt you'd have a good record with Doug Martin, Ryan Matthews, or Toby as your running backs. You wouldn't do well with DT and Alshon Jeffery as your high picks either. As with any strategy, it all depends on having picked the right players. No strategy reigns supreme.

 

[cloppbeast]

Second of all, the zero-running back name is very misleading. You wouldn't win at all if you selected zero running backs. How about late-running back strategy?

 

[buck naked]

I went Julio and DT as my 1-2 pick. morris and Jennings as 3-4 Matty ice at 5 then the next 6 picks I took flier running backs on 5 of the 6 picks. Helps that I picked up asiata of waivers whose been a stud last few games when I was just expecting just a flex. So far I'm happy with the results. Right now only first round running back that's paying off is matt forte. Ap, Jamal, shady McCoy, montee ball, and lacy are all struggling.

That's not zero RB. That's many RB.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Can someone explain how this is different from the old tried and true Upside Down drafting that Waldman has been writing about for years?

 

[buck naked]

In a nutshell, Zero RB will take at least 4-5 WRs with a stud TE usually sprinkled in before even thinking about an RB. Upside-down is usually a WR-WR start.

 

[RealReactions]

I went Julio and DT as my 1-2 pick. morris and Jennings as 3-4 Matty ice at 5 then the next 6 picks I took flier running backs on 5 of the 6 picks. Helps that I picked up asiata of waivers whose been a stud last few games when I was just expecting just a flex. So far I'm happy with the results. Right now only first round running back that's paying off is matt forte. Ap, Jamal, shady McCoy, montee ball, and lacy are all struggling.

That's not zero RB. That many RB.

Zero running back strategy is when you take no running backs the first 2 rounds bud. Clearly you didn't do this strategy.

 

[buck naked]

I went Julio and DT as my 1-2 pick. morris and Jennings as 3-4 Matty ice at 5 then the next 6 picks I took flier running backs on 5 of the 6 picks. Helps that I picked up asiata of waivers whose been a stud last few games when I was just expecting just a flex. So far I'm happy with the results. Right now only first round running back that's paying off is matt forte. Ap, Jamal, shady McCoy, montee ball, and lacy are all struggling.

That's not zero RB. That many RB.

Zero running back strategy is when you take no running backs the first 2 rounds bud. Clearly you didn't do this strategy.

Clearly you don't know what ZERO RB is. http://rotoviz.com/2013/11/zero-rb-antifragility-and-the-myth-of-value-based-drafting/

This article is from one of the leading proponents of the strategy. You're welcome.

And one more thing. I've been in drafts with this author, Shawn Siegele. I've watched the strategy firsthand, on more than one occasion. I am very aware of what it is.

 

[Rodeojones]

Had the 1.11 in a 12 team PPR keeper league and kept Dez Bryant (which was my 1.11). Went with Julio and the Zac Stacy at the 3.11 Ended the draft with classic Zero RB players such as J. Bell, Vereen, P. Thomas (Saints), and Jeremy Hill. My two starting RB's this weekend were waiver wire pick ups (Donald Brown and Ahmad Bradshaw).

I'm currently 1-3...

 

[TheNext0]

1-3 and struggling

Calvin, Antonio Brown, Andre Johnson to start

Toby Gerhart and Ryan Mathews to follow

 

[RealReactions]

I went Julio and DT as my 1-2 pick. morris and Jennings as 3-4 Matty ice at 5 then the next 6 picks I took flier running backs on 5 of the 6 picks. Helps that I picked up asiata of waivers whose been a stud last few games when I was just expecting just a flex. So far I'm happy with the results. Right now only first round running back that's paying off is matt forte. Ap, Jamal, shady McCoy, montee ball, and lacy are all struggling.

That's not zero RB. That many RB.

Zero running back strategy is when you take no running backs the first 2 rounds bud. Clearly you didn't do this strategy.

Clearly you don't know what ZERO RB is. http://rotoviz.com/2013/11/zero-rb-antifragility-and-the-myth-of-value-based-drafting/This article is from one of the leading proponents of the strategy. You're welcome.

And one more thing. I've been in drafts with this author, Shawn Siegele. I've watched the strategy firsthand, on more than one occasion. I am very aware of what it is.

What does having to draft with that author have to do with anything? That is his take on the "zero rb" method. The one that I was taught years ago was to avoid the top 2 rounds of running backs because they have the highest bust rate. You make it seem like you know everything because you drafted with a guy who wrote an article. Big whoop dude your not special.

 

[Omniscient Deity]

Draft the right players. Simple as that.

 

[cloppbeast]

Draft the right players. Simple as that.

I usually go with this strategy.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Draft the right players. Simple as that.

This is kind of an antiquated strategy, but it still works if it's executed right.

 

[Ilov80s]

Draft the right players. Simple as that.

I usually go with this strategy.

I usually drafts the wrong players and trade them for the right players. Sometimes 1 wrong can make 2 rights.

 

[cvnpoka]

I went Julio and DT as my 1-2 pick. morris and Jennings as 3-4 Matty ice at 5 then the next 6 picks I took flier running backs on 5 of the 6 picks. Helps that I picked up asiata of waivers whose been a stud last few games when I was just expecting just a flex. So far I'm happy with the results. Right now only first round running back that's paying off is matt forte. Ap, Jamal, shady McCoy, montee ball, and lacy are all struggling.

That's not zero RB. That many RB.

Zero running back strategy is when you take no running backs the first 2 rounds bud. Clearly you didn't do this strategy.

Clearly you don't know what ZERO RB is. http://rotoviz.com/2013/11/zero-rb-antifragility-and-the-myth-of-value-based-drafting/

This article is from one of the leading proponents of the strategy. You're welcome.

And one more thing. I've been in drafts with this author, Shawn Siegele. I've watched the strategy firsthand, on more than one occasion. I am very aware of what it is.

that article is lol bad

 

[Adam Harstad]

Clearly you don't know what ZERO RB is. http://rotoviz.com/2013/11/zero-rb-antifragility-and-the-myth-of-value-based-drafting/

This article is from one of the leading proponents of the strategy. You're welcome.

And one more thing. I've been in drafts with this author, Shawn Siegele. I've watched the strategy firsthand, on more than one occasion. I am very aware of what it is.

What does having to draft with that author have to do with anything? That is his take on the "zero rb" method. The one that I was taught years ago was to avoid the top 2 rounds of running backs because they have the highest bust rate. You make it seem like you know everything because you drafted with a guy who wrote an article. Big whoop dude your not special.

Zero RB is not a general description, it is a specific name. Shawn Siegele laid out a strategy in that article and named it "Zero RB". That name has now spread around the fantasy community. When someone says "I'm drafting Zero RB", it is typically interpreted as "I'm using the specific strategy named 'Zero RB' that Shawn Siegele wrote about in that article on Rotoviz".

 

[bagger]

I've always been against this strategy as I still believe RBs are the key to fantasy football.

As I've argued many times, while the NFL has become a passing league, this only makes RBs more valuable and QBs and WRs less valuable. Not sure why so many people think the opposite would be true. There are more viable WRs and QBs, and less viable RBs. Which makes the RBs more valuable.

If people waited until the 3rd/4th to get a RB, they were probably getting one of these guys as their #1 RB:

Reggie Bush, Joique, Gerhart, Sankey, Gore, Vereen, Rashad Jennings, Ridley, Spiller

Now if you landed Gore and Jennings you're probably happy, but otherwise....

Just curious what people think about this strategy now that we're a month into the season.

i am leading my league in points. So very happy with it.

 

[Leonidas]

2-2 and not favored this week with Calvin, Nelson, Gronk to open (unlucky week 1 where I score 3rd most but lost as I faced the Peyton + Julius ) (drafted freaking Brady too)

3-1 in my only RB heavy league where I took Peterson in the 1st and Martin in the 3rd...because I took Antonio Brown in the second and also took Andrew Luck.

Cliffs: Drafting the right players = success.

 

[AMT]

Right now my RB1 is Donald Brown and my RB2 is Steven Jackson. 12 team league

#whenZeroRBgoeswrong

The team is also 3-1 but its as lucky as it gets.

 

[Skoo]

As always, picking the right players can make any strategy look good or bad. If you went RB/RB and started with Lacy/Foster you're off to a pretty slow start, as is the guy that avoided RBs and started with Demaryius/Marshall.

The gyst of the argument for avoiding RBs is that the bust risk is lower in other positions, but what's ignored is that the ceiling is lower as well. I went Dez/Green in one league, and even though those were probably two of the better non-RB picks early on I feel like my team is pretty middling and they're not really making a huge difference to my RB deficiencies. Compare that to someone that went Lynch/Murray to start and they're at a MUCH bigger advantage than I am. Someone that went Lynch/Murray/Bell to start could probably have left the rest of their lineup empty and be sitting at 4-0 right now.

This is in reference to non-ppr, generally, but while it may be easier to "hit" on a non-RB, doing so doesn't provide you nearly the advantage that hitting on a RB does. Bottom line, even though I picked the "right" WRs at the end of the first round going WR/WR, my team has not been strong. If I'd picked the right RBs there, even though it's harder to do, I can't imagine I'd be saying that.

This is generally how I feel about it.

Yes, there have been 1st round busts at RB (as there always are) but in my mind this is a reason to go MORE RB heavy, not less. There are more RB busts and a LOT more RB injuries, so the more RBs I draft, the better chance I have of "hitting" on someone or having quality depth so that if someone does go down it doesn't ruin my team.

You can always see this especially when it gets to week 10 or so. Generally you can always find a servicable WR or QB on waivers but finding a quality RB at that point in the season is GOLD.

Scarcity = Value

 

[GoBirds]

What a stupid name for it.

 

[buck naked]

What a stupid name for it.

That might be the best comment in the thread. I was arguing with RealReactions about what "zero RB" is, when the name is the real problem.

 

[Skoo]

Yeah I just used "Zero-RB" because that seemed to be the trendy name for it this year.

Other years it was called upside-down drafting, or just going WR-WR, but it's all the same basic concept.

 

[Leonidas]

As always, picking the right players can make any strategy look good or bad. If you went RB/RB and started with Lacy/Foster you're off to a pretty slow start, as is the guy that avoided RBs and started with Demaryius/Marshall.

The gyst of the argument for avoiding RBs is that the bust risk is lower in other positions, but what's ignored is that the ceiling is lower as well. I went Dez/Green in one league, and even though those were probably two of the better non-RB picks early on I feel like my team is pretty middling and they're not really making a huge difference to my RB deficiencies. Compare that to someone that went Lynch/Murray to start and they're at a MUCH bigger advantage than I am. Someone that went Lynch/Murray/Bell to start could probably have left the rest of their lineup empty and be sitting at 4-0 right now.

This is in reference to non-ppr, generally, but while it may be easier to "hit" on a non-RB, doing so doesn't provide you nearly the advantage that hitting on a RB does. Bottom line, even though I picked the "right" WRs at the end of the first round going WR/WR, my team has not been strong. If I'd picked the right RBs there, even though it's harder to do, I can't imagine I'd be saying that.

This is generally how I feel about it.

Yes, there have been 1st round busts at RB (as there always are) but in my mind this is a reason to go MORE RB heavy, not less. There are more RB busts and a LOT more RB injuries, so the more RBs I draft, the better chance I have of "hitting" on someone or having quality depth so that if someone does go down it doesn't ruin my team.

You can always see this especially when it gets to week 10 or so. Generally you can always find a servicable WR or QB on waivers but finding a quality RB at that point in the season is GOLD.

Scarcity = Value

Flipside: If you don't draft a top of the line WR, you are virtually guaranteed to miss out on top of the line WR production (or anything close to it) out of the players you drafted. However, if you don't draft any of the top RB's you still have a shot at landing a top production RB, probably in the first month of the season, when he comes out of nowhere or the starter(s) gets injured.

 

[cvnpoka]

As always, picking the right players can make any strategy look good or bad. If you went RB/RB and started with Lacy/Foster you're off to a pretty slow start, as is the guy that avoided RBs and started with Demaryius/Marshall.

The gyst of the argument for avoiding RBs is that the bust risk is lower in other positions, but what's ignored is that the ceiling is lower as well. I went Dez/Green in one league, and even though those were probably two of the better non-RB picks early on I feel like my team is pretty middling and they're not really making a huge difference to my RB deficiencies. Compare that to someone that went Lynch/Murray to start and they're at a MUCH bigger advantage than I am. Someone that went Lynch/Murray/Bell to start could probably have left the rest of their lineup empty and be sitting at 4-0 right now.

This is in reference to non-ppr, generally, but while it may be easier to "hit" on a non-RB, doing so doesn't provide you nearly the advantage that hitting on a RB does. Bottom line, even though I picked the "right" WRs at the end of the first round going WR/WR, my team has not been strong. If I'd picked the right RBs there, even though it's harder to do, I can't imagine I'd be saying that.

This is generally how I feel about it.

Yes, there have been 1st round busts at RB (as there always are) but in my mind this is a reason to go MORE RB heavy, not less. There are more RB busts and a LOT more RB injuries, so the more RBs I draft, the better chance I have of "hitting" on someone or having quality depth so that if someone does go down it doesn't ruin my team.

You can always see this especially when it gets to week 10 or so. Generally you can always find a servicable WR or QB on waivers but finding a quality RB at that point in the season is GOLD.

Scarcity = Value

Flipside: If you don't draft a top of the line WR, you are virtually guaranteed to miss out on top of the line WR production (or anything close to it) out of the players you drafted. However, if you don't draft any of the top RB's you still have a shot at landing a top production RB, probably in the first month of the season, when he comes out of nowhere or the starter(s) gets injured.

def not guaranteed to miss out on top line wr production. this year is a bit different in that the top wr all went in the 2nd round, but even this year you would be doing fine with maclin, kelvin, and sanders. and ofc steve smith.

but look at other years: we have brandon lloyd, josh gordon. in 2011, cruz, nelson and welker were top 5. this is really the outlier year on wr, but its also due to the sheer amount of wr that went early.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Yes, there have been 1st round busts at RB (as there always are) but in my mind this is a reason to go MORE RB heavy, not less. There are more RB busts and a LOT more RB injuries, so the more RBs I draft, the better chance I have of "hitting" on someone or having quality depth so that if someone does go down it doesn't ruin my team.

The author of the Zero RB article considers this (and acknowledges that it was his own thinking a year ago), but ultimately suggests that instead of spending extra high picks on high-quality depth, it makes sense to spend a lower pick on someone who isn't as high-quality at the moment, but may become high-quality if there is an injury.

In other words, you're saying to draft Giovanni Bernard and Ryan Mathews, and he's saying to draft Jeremy Hill and Danny Woodhead.

Personally, I would consider a way to get some of the benefits of both strategies: handcuffing. Draft Giovanni Bernard and Jeremy Hill, or Ryan Mathews and Danny Woodhead. You still get some star power at RB, and you still avoid some fragility, but it's cheaper than Stud RB strategy, and you're not relying on injuries as with Zero RB strategy.

 

[Drinkin Buddy]

In a 3 keeper ppr league with fairly shallow benches I have gone from this on wk 1:

Peterson

Rice

Mcfadden

Deangelo

Freeman

to:

Matthews

Ivory

Asiata

Ridley

Ingram

all acquired off waiver wire.

I'm 4-0.

 

[Leonidas]

In a 3 keeper ppr league with fairly shallow benches I have gone from this on wk 1:

Peterson

Rice

Mcfadden

Deangelo

Freeman

to:

Matthews

Ivory

Asiata

Ridley

Ingram

all acquired off waiver wire.

I'm 4-0.

Your league mates don't seem to be very good at this lol

 

[Drinkin Buddy]

In a 3 keeper ppr league with fairly shallow benches I have gone from this on wk 1:

Peterson

Rice

Mcfadden

Deangelo

Freeman

to:

Matthews

Ivory

Asiata

Ridley

Ingram

all acquired off waiver wire.

I'm 4-0.

Your league mates don't seem to be very good at this lol

Most of them are sharks in a deep dynasty league thus this league gets a little less attention. I've blown almost all of my BB budget and the benches are shallow forcing injured players onto ww sometimes. Matthews had no business being there though. Foles, Calvin, Antonio Brown, Delanie Walker have carried my team, my RBs are likely performing below average.

 

[Leonidas]

In a 3 keeper ppr league with fairly shallow benches I have gone from this on wk 1:

Peterson

Rice

Mcfadden

Deangelo

Freeman

to:

Matthews

Ivory

Asiata

Ridley

Ingram

all acquired off waiver wire.

I'm 4-0.

Your league mates don't seem to be very good at this lol

Most of them are sharks in a deep dynasty league thus this league gets a little less attention. I've blown almost all of my BB budget and the benches are shallow forcing injured players onto ww sometimes. Matthews had no business being there though. Foles, Calvin, Antonio Brown, Delanie Walker have carried my team, my RBs are likely performing below average.

Ingram had no place on the waiver wire either. Ivory as well, if to a lesser extent.

 

[jeaton6]

In a 3 keeper ppr league with fairly shallow benches I have gone from this on wk 1:

Peterson

Rice

Mcfadden

Deangelo

Freeman

to:

Matthews

Ivory

Asiata

Ridley

Ingram

all acquired off waiver wire.

I'm 4-0.

Your league mates don't seem to be very good at this lol

Most of them are sharks in a deep dynasty league thus this league gets a little less attention. I've blown almost all of my BB budget and the benches are shallow forcing injured players onto ww sometimes. Matthews had no business being there though. Foles, Calvin, Antonio Brown, Delanie Walker have carried my team, my RBs are likely performing below average.

Ingram had no place on the waiver wire either. Ivory as well, if to a lesser extent.

Depends on the depth of the bench (he said shallow) and starting RB requirements. Ivory and Ingram on wire in short bench 3 keeper league is completely reasonable. I'm in multiple short bench 3 keeper leagues (8 starters, 6 bench) and only ones presently rostered of above are Ivory, Asiata and Ridley.

 

[mgodbee22]

I took M. Ball, D. Murray, and L. Bell in the first 3 rounds in one league. Backed that up with Emmanuel Sanders, Kelvin Benjamin, Ty Hilton, and Gronk at TE. Drafted Rivers late as hell and I am 4-0 in first place.

My other league I took Marshall, Julio, and L. Bell then the PPR goldmines of Bush, Sproles, F. Jackson, etc. Again with Gronk and Rivers and the WRs above. I am 3-1 in 2nd place in that league.

Both leagues I picked 8th. You can do it either way. I also don't know that you can write off McCoy, Charles, Lacy, etc. It is a long season. I imagine a lot of people that took D. Thomas, C. Johnson, Dez, Vincent Jackson, AJ, Alshon Jeffrey, Keenan Allen, Victor Cruz, and even Jimmy Graham aren't doing so well either.

My method of preferring RBs that catch passes (both leagues PPR), Big WRs, people on good offenses, and Fred Jackson and P. Rivers as my QB. I am not joking when I say I have had Sproles, Rivers, and Fred Jackson on almost every team I have had in the last 5-6 years. They are criminally underdrafted every year. My only unbreakable rule is no boom bust guys as starters. I will never have Kap, Newton, C. Johnson, Spiller, etc. on my team. I would rather have someone get 10 pts every week than someone getting 20 one week and 5 the next.

 

[Leonidas]

I took M. Ball, D. Murray, and L. Bell in the first 3 rounds in one league. Backed that up with Emmanuel Sanders, Kelvin Benjamin, Ty Hilton, and Gronk at TE. Drafted Rivers late as hell and I am 4-0 in first place.

What round did you get Gronk?

 

[mgodbee22]

I took M. Ball, D. Murray, and L. Bell in the first 3 rounds in one league. Backed that up with Emmanuel Sanders, Kelvin Benjamin, Ty Hilton, and Gronk at TE. Drafted Rivers late as hell and I am 4-0 in first place.

What round did you get Gronk?

round 4 both times

 

[Bacon]

Not exactly 0 RB but I my first 7 picks were:

Calvin Johnson

Julius Thomas

Arian Foster

Larry Fitzgerald

CJ Spiller

Jay Cutler

Lamar Miller

Fitz has been a bust so far, but the rest of my draft I can't argue with. I'm currently tied for first in my division with a 2-2 record, but I have the most points in the league and I beat the #2 and #3 teams so far. I also have the most points against, which sucks (hence the 2 losses, both by slim margins).

 

[cloppbeast]

As always, picking the right players can make any strategy look good or bad. If you went RB/RB and started with Lacy/Foster you're off to a pretty slow start, as is the guy that avoided RBs and started with Demaryius/Marshall.

The gyst of the argument for avoiding RBs is that the bust risk is lower in other positions, but what's ignored is that the ceiling is lower as well. I went Dez/Green in one league, and even though those were probably two of the better non-RB picks early on I feel like my team is pretty middling and they're not really making a huge difference to my RB deficiencies. Compare that to someone that went Lynch/Murray to start and they're at a MUCH bigger advantage than I am. Someone that went Lynch/Murray/Bell to start could probably have left the rest of their lineup empty and be sitting at 4-0 right now.

This is in reference to non-ppr, generally, but while it may be easier to "hit" on a non-RB, doing so doesn't provide you nearly the advantage that hitting on a RB does. Bottom line, even though I picked the "right" WRs at the end of the first round going WR/WR, my team has not been strong. If I'd picked the right RBs there, even though it's harder to do, I can't imagine I'd be saying that.

Good post.

But, what running backs did you get later on? I would think you could do pretty well with Dez/AJ if you got decent running backs in rounds 3-7.

I generally agree with you about the upside/safe argument, though. An owner probably has better chance not finishing last by avoiding running backs in rounds 1-3. But hitting on running backs in those rounds gives an owner pretty good odds at most points in the league. At least, that's how it went down weeks 1-4 this year. Who knows, weeks 5-9 could tell a different story; and just like the 2015 could tell an entirely different one.

Edit: It certainly helps this strategy that some late round sleepers have emerged at WR producing WR1 numbers, like KB, Sanders, Steve Smith Sr, yet many of the running back sleepers haven't hit so much. This might be something specific to the first few weeks of this season.